13 links to LM October 2004 articles in a row?
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| incinerator Jan 07, 2005 5:25 AM EDT |
Well, I think this is a new record and the award goes to dave. Today he newswired 13 articles from the October 2004 issue of Linux Magazine, in a row. Posting 13 articles in a row coming from the same source may something I could be persuaded to see the sense in. However, if these articles are from OCTOBER 2004 and therefore 3 months old I sort of get slightly annoyed. We are not Linux Magazine, are we? Or is somebody trying to bully us into buying LM subscriptions ("If 10 lxers buy a LM subscription each I will stop flooding")? These articles are just on-line versions of their paper issue, published with 3 months delay (yeah they actually sell it on paper, that thin white stuff you can write or print on). Usually many articles from a current copy of Linux Magazine get discussed by the affected communities and bloggers. I don't think there is a need to link to every single article if they are that old, imho selection should be narrowed to one to three articles at most. Please try to persuade me if you think different (= comments are appreciated). |
| dave Jan 07, 2005 5:59 AM EDT |
I've been doing this for a year now (check the story archives and you'll see that this flurry has been repeated each month). The way I figure it, it is indeed content that is new to the web, and maybe you'd be interested in seeing it. On the other hand, if it's offensive (or irritating) to see such a flurry, maybe I can program a filter for you so that you don't see news from that particular source. Or, an editorial decision should be made not to post those stories, which would certainly be the path of least resistance for me. dave |
| incinerator Jan 07, 2005 6:51 AM EDT |
Well, I have not been here for so long (surprise surprise). However, I really can't see the use of posting all these stories. Maybe you could post 3 articles you think are most important at once and others later, distributed over several days. That certainly lessens the "flood" effect. Another idea would be to post the three most "remarkeable" articles and refer to the rest with a newswire post like "Btw, LM has made their articles from the November 2004 issue available on-line again." Then lxers could have a look at the articles and decide individually if one of them is lxer-worthy or not. I appreciate your opinion that this content is new to the web. Nevertheless, some of the articles are not that new regarding their topics. I've never really liked any of the paper-published magazines dealing with Linux and/or Free Software. That's why I think it is more or less impossible that all articles out of one single issue are so good they should all get published here. Something like a single reference that linux-mag.com has done its regular re-publish update would be enough for me and hopefully for many others. Cheers, Dominik |
| PaulFerris Jan 07, 2005 8:12 AM EDT |
How about one LXer page that has all the links? Or just a news item that says "Linux Mag has a bunch of old slimy content posted up for those of you interested in viewing stuff that's 3 months out of date." Then you could just use the same story page content as well -- a link to the front of the mag. I like that, it sets the right tone... --FeriCyde PS: Yeah, that's kind of cynical, but it's one of the side-effects of having a signature style... |
| Glimmung Jan 07, 2005 8:41 AM EDT |
My only problem with the monthly rush of Linux Mag. articles is that it pushes so many recent articles off of the front page in favour of one source. Perhaps a delayed release onto LXer, or perhaps Linux mag. would care to release their articles in a more staggered manner. Or leave it as it is and we can just deal with it (don't you normally release them over the weekend? traditionally a low usage time). As for the content they seem much like any other source to me, some good, some bad, some ugly, some editorial pointlessness and some thinly disguised Ads. |
| chappaquachap Jan 07, 2005 12:59 PM EDT |
Please continue the current policy, publishing the material as it becomes available, so all stories are presented in the same way, with no need for filters or digging into a separate link. |
| devnet Jan 11, 2005 7:20 AM EDT |
Some people eat bugs.... ;P I think that we should talk about that instead of what Dave 'should be allowed' to post to HIS website. Lxer IS and will continue to be the best damn source for news...whether or not it takes you a few extra clicks to reach the news you want to read. devent |
| tuxchick Jan 15, 2005 4:13 PM EDT |
I agree with Glimmung. Spacing them out a bit would not crowd out other stories, and it wouldn't look like such a flood. They do belong here, Linux Magazine runs good articles. And for those folks who do not like publications that have Microsoft ads, they do not run Microsoft ads. So show 'em some love. |
| TxtEdMacs Jan 16, 2005 2:52 PM EDT |
tuxchick: since when have they stopped running MS ads? I dropped buying this magazine not because of the MS ads (I never saw get the facts type ad), it was just because in so many respects they were so clueless. Free to them initially meant no cost. Get an earlier issue and see some product reviews where the reviewer complains about the product having a charge! At the time too I was no fan of perl, and the "perls of wisdom" articles that stressed making perl code ever more arcane to anybody other than the most devoted put me off further. This is not a claim they do not have some quality articles, rather if I had to make a choice I would select Linux Journal and Linux Format over Linux Magazine. |
| tuxchick Jan 16, 2005 6:19 PM EDT |
Oh yeah, they did run M$ ads. And even a CD once. I don't pay that much attention enough, I guess. Anyway I like Linux Mag. |
| TxtEdMacs Jan 17, 2005 10:34 AM EDT |
tuxchick: I do not have the time at the moment to explain completely, but taking MS money is a sore issue here particularly in regards to the site LinixToday, which Dave was a co-founder. The latter, LinuxToday, cites Linux Magazine in justifying their taking of the MS cash. Moreover, they made the claim that Linux Journal also took MS advertising money (see LJ last letter to the editor Feb., 2005 issue where the VP of marketing answers this spurious claim - too nicely IMHO). There are too many that jump on "trends" just to cash in. In my view Linux Magazine and the site LinuxToday come too near to that standard to allow me to support either. I stopped visiting Linux Today not too long after Dave left. Not too long after that I even removed my bookmark for the site. Perhaps, Linux Magazine has improved, but with the words coming out of Redmond being so disingenuous I try not to throw cash anywhere that has MS as a sponsor. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [Editors, MEMBERS, SITEADMINS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!